Memeorandum

November 05, 2006

Red Storm Rising

The WaPo rallies it base with optimism for Dems but buries what might have been a lead on another day, so I will bury it too (But for the impatient, paragraph five notes a Republican surge in national polls). Here we go:

Two
days before a bitterly fought midterm election, Democrats have moved
into position to recapture the House and have laid siege to the Senate,
setting the stage for a dramatic recasting of the power structure in
Washington for President Bush's final two years in office, according to
a Washington Post analysis of competitive races across the country.

Can't you feel the excitement!

In the battle for the House, Democrats appear almost certain to pick up
more than the 15 seats needed to regain the majority. Republicans
virtually concede 10 seats, and a split of the 30 tossup races would
add an additional 15 to the Democratic column.

That is similar to other estimates, including that of the ebullient NY Times. However, the next paragraph on the Senate hits a speedbump:

The Senate poses a tougher challenge for Democrats, who need to gain
six seats to take control of that chamber. A three-seat gain is almost
assured, but they would have to find the other three seats from four
states considered to have tossup races -- Virginia, Tennessee, Missouri
and Montana.

Tennessee a toss-up? Not per the Times, which has it leaning Red, and not per recent polls, in which Corker has moved ahead by 8-10 points. But here is the bombshell from paragraph five:

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll
shows some narrowing in the Democratic advantage in House races. The
survey gives the Democrats a six-percentage-point lead nationally among
likely voters asked which party they prefer for Congress. It was 14
points two weeks ago, but this remains a larger advantage than they
have had in recent midterm elections.

The Reps have gone from down fourteen to down six in just two weeks, we had a great employment report on Friday, and the WaPo thinks this is over? Bring it on!

In governors' races, Democrats are likely to emerge with the majority
for the first time in 12 years. Five states are almost certain to
switch parties, including the key battlegrounds of New York,
Massachusetts and Ohio. Four races are too close to call, but only one
of those seats -- in Wisconsin -- is held by a Democrat.

New York and Massachusetts are now "key battlegrounds"? Sure, it was fun having Republican governors there, but I thought that the phrase "battleground states" was generally reserved for the swing states in the Presidential elections, like Ohio.

Republicans Cut Democratic Lead in Campaign's Final DaysDemocrats Hold 47%-43% Lead Among Likely Voters

A nationwide Pew Research Center survey finds voting intentions
shifting in the direction of Republican congressional candidates in the
final days of the 2006 midterm campaign. The new survey finds a growing
percentage of likely voters saying they will vote for GOP candidates.
However, the Democrats still hold a 48% to 40% lead among registered
voters, and a modest lead of 47%-43% among likely voters.

The narrowing of the Democratic lead raises questions about whether
the party will win a large enough share of the popular vote to
recapture control of the House of Representatives. The relationship
between a party's share of the popular vote and the number of seats it
wins is less certain than it once was, in large part because of the
increasing prevalence of safe seat redistricting. As a result,
forecasting seat gains from national surveys has become more difficult.

Comments

“I just presumed that what I considered to be the most competent national-security team since Truman was indeed going to be competent,” Adelman says in the article. “They turned out to be among the most incompetent teams in the post-war era. Not only did each of them, individually, have enormous flaws, but together they were deadly, dysfunctional.”

And Perle says, “I think if I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, ‘Should we go into Iraq?,’ I think now I probably would have said, ‘No, let’s consider other strategies for dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.”

The almost certain election of Deval Patrick as Gov of MA is not battleground, but it is a very bad omen here. I expect the state to become completely unlivable for business. I expect taxes to soar, and I expect unbelievable levels of corruption given that nearly 100% of elected officials in this state are democrats.

The interviewer, David Rose , is one of the few British journos who does support the war. He was known to them and trusted by them.
Trust no one with a press badge is the lesson, altho the interviewees should have considered the publication he was doing this for.

Jane, we're still living with the Dukakoids' temporary emergency 18 month tax hikethat the 87% Democrat MA legislature clung on to throughout 16 years of Republican governors and years where we ran billion-dollar surpluses (in the Democrat sense that over-taxation is a 'surplus'). Heaven help us.

Clarice...this is an interesting comment at Ace's place...(also note the familiaor organizations mention that are mentioned in your freeper comment to sbw on the other thread)

..."New York Post reporter Ryan Sager exposed the scam when he got hold of a 2004 videotape of former Pew official Sean Treglia telling a roomful of journalists and professors how Pew and other foundations spent years bankrolling various experts, ostensibly independent nonprofits (including the Center for Public Integrity and Democracy 21), and media outlets (NPR got $1.2 million for "news coverage of financial influence in political decision-making")--all aimed at fooling Washington into thinking that Americans were clamoring for reform, when in truth there was little public pressure to "clean up the system." "The target group for all this activity was 535 people in Washington," said Mr. Treglia matter-of-factly, referring to Congress. "The idea was to create an impression that a mass movement was afoot--that everywhere they looked, in academic institutions, in the business community, in religious groups, in ethnic groups, everywhere, people were talking about reform.""--Brian C. Anderson (http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007867)

All elections are. I avoid the political media especially in the few weeks around elections. All that stuff is, IMO, aimed to maintain the illusion that the people have some control over their betters.

That aside, I figure the GOP wing holds both the House and Senate, and will make about the same of the next 2 years as they made of the last 2 years. For my part, we'll return Snowe to the Senate and Allen to the House (but neither with my vote).

When Patrick gets elected the state Dem party will run exactly like Menino runs Boston. Ignore the middle class and let them leave. Then you have a mix of guilt belt liberals, transients, gov't workers and other gov't dependents. A permanent Dem majority!

***Pew Research has published its crosstabs for the poll that shows the Republicans tightening up the race, which I linked last night. The internals deliver even more bad news to the Democrats, as significant leads in several demographic categories have been cut drastically or wiped out entirely.

The last Pew Research poll was taken in early October. In a month, the Democrats have lost non-minorities altogether. The gap among all whites went from +5 Democrats to +5 GOP, a ten-point swing. White females had supported Democrats by a 15-point margin and a majority (55-40), but now give the GOP a 2-point lead. The Democrats have also lost the middle class, a big problem in this election. **(more)

After it's all over, I'm going to try to find the various trends to see who had the least last-minute surges. That would be the best poll by definition. (I bet Rove's polls don't show big surges, but we probably can't see those.)

"One prominent Republican, who asked me not to use his name, said the last effective play by the White House came at the end of the summer when it defended its war policy. Then, in all seriousness, he proposed this course of action should have been taken by Bush: "The president should go on a two-and-a-half week vacation, and when he gets back, go right into the hospital for minor surgery. In other words, he should have disappeared."

My guess is they are having to clean out their undies... Read this from the New Republic ( John Judis of the "Emerging Democrat Majority" fame is referenced ).

John Judis and I have been e-mailing about the alarming Pew poll that came out today. It reflects the same trends captured by that earlier Washington Post/ABC poll, except that the trends are, gulp, even more pronounced. Worse, the folks at Pew have graciously posted their cross-tabs, which makes it nearly impossible to rationalize the lousy results. As John points out, the fact that Democrats’ 15-point advantage among white women last month has turned into a 2-point disadvantage today is incredibly ominous. Unfortunately, it’s not quite as ominous as the erosion in the Democrats’ advantage among Northeasterners: from 26 points to 9. The Northeast is, of course, a region where Democrats are banking on roughly half a dozen pick-ups. That kind of dropoff isn’t going to get the job done.

isnt going to get the job done? All dressed up and no date comes calling?

Jane--I think Barone has been a bit more nueanced than that..aa couple of nights ago he was saying (almost alone) he saw no tsunami but closer to a 10 seat pickup..Last night, he said if he had to bet a lot of money, he'd bet the Dems would take the house, but he never said it would be by much.

My head says what the PEW crosstabs show and your gut tells you, Kerry reminded everyone what they hate about his party.
*******************
Holly Bailey of Newsweek (on MSNBC) saying that "everybody" expected the race to tighten by now.

Oh, really? Then what of her own magazine's final poll, which features a 16-point spread in the generic poll in favor of the Democrats?

And why is Rahm Emanuel saying he's scared? This is nonsense. Everybody in Washington has believed the GOP is going to get hammered for months and months now. It may yet happen.

But this kind of tush-covering just isn't cricket. Posted at 11:21 AM

Good News [John Podhoretz] Al Hunt is on MSNBC saying the GOP trend is being overexaggerated.

Al Hunt is, without question, the single worst prognosticator in the history of Washington punditry — an almost perfect negative barometer.

UPDATE: Reader Noel P. writes: "Now all we need is Bob Shrum to call it for the Dems and we can all sleep well tonight.'

Barone is just being a weasel. He predicted the Dems pick up 16 House seats-i.e. 1 extra, so when they take it he says he was right, but if they don't, he can say-well I hardly predicted a big takeover.

If its such a sure thing then put you money up where you big fat mouth is. $.70 gets you a dollar if Tradesport is right. Thats a great return for two days wait. Take your own advice big guy. (And you may want to change your shorts, cuz the stink is getting pretty bad downwind). Big talkers will be prety scarce soon enough.

A McCulloch Research poll conducted over the weekend suggests the senate race in PA is tightening. It reports State Treasurer Bob Casey, Jr. leads Senator Rick Santorum 48.1-44.1% among "very likely voters." There's an interesting breakdown of how the election is shaping up regionally, and while McCulloch maintains the race is still Mr. Casey's to lose, he believes that Senator Santorum is now within striking distance. He even uses the word "upset."

Given the dismal flatness of the PA polls over the last eight weeks, the only factor that explains this shift is the John Kerry Factor. After Senator Kerry (D-EU) made his unfortunate "gaffe" last week, Mr. Casey, secure in his lead, played the party loyalist and praised Mr. Kerry's leadership and patriotism. Mr. Santorum pounced, released a powerful new ad (view it below), and may well be getting some traction at very long last. As the Senator is fond of saying, "My opponents win polls. I win elections." He speaks with the wisdom of experience and while this is still a long shot folks, if PA is back in play tomorrow's results remain anyone's guess despite what you might read in the Washington Post or the New York Times.

Well trend at Tradesport is dropping and with the election approaching it should be approaching 1, but if you are so confident, $1500 is chump change. Put up some real money piker. You can also probably get a real deal on never used drapes from Nancy.

Good catch, don--when you're right, you're right and on McCulloch you are:
"Early this morning, Keystone Politics editors received and released a poll by McCulloch Research and Polling showing that Rick Santorum was within 4 points of retaining his Senate seat. Further research into McCulloch Research and Polling shows that Rod McCulloch, principal at the firm, has been indicted in voter fraud and forgery in Illinois."

Republicans can't beat Obama and Ford. They told us so last night. God is their campaign manager. In a church. And don't say anything about separation of church/state. That doesn't count when it is democrats...my only theory there is they don't believe democrats are serious when it comes to religion and are given a pass. I'm sure someone will come up with a better reason...

Want a reason to doubt all the polls? Here you go. Rasmussen admits he is sampling more Democrats than Republicans. Here is what his website says:

At Rasmussen Reports, we adjust our party identification weighting targets each month based upon actual survey results from the previous 90 days. For the month of November, our partisan weighting targets are 37.3% Democrat, 31.9% Republican, and 30.8% unaffiliated.

So if surveys are having trouble with response rates and just geting to people due to things like cell phones and caller ID, why wouldnt a survey of voter ID being just as dicey? This is a change in voter ID of 5% from the 2004 election when Republicans and Democrats turned out 37% to 37%.

Michael Steele addressing a call center with volunteers for his election:

“How many of you have gotten into an argument because of this race?”

The crowd murmured in assent, acknowledging the difficulties of explaining their support for Steele to friends and, in some cases, family members. For many African-Americans in PG County, voting Republican is uncharted terrain. This isn’t discouraging them. When Steele said, “I need you to keep having those arguments,” someone replied, “I will,” and the crowd responded with laughter and applause.

Watershed election and the press is absolutely missing the story ( or burying it ).

I am watching Jon Carry sit at home, the standard bearer of his party last election. A total leper, no one wants to even have a missed call on the cell phone. Up your bet or shut your yap since we got your point long ago. You aint voting Republican. Funny thing is, you never have so why is this news?

"The generic-vote question persistently underprojected Republican vote share from 1994 to 2002. It did a better job of projecting Democratic vote share but missed the important thing: Republicans trailed on the generic vote every time except 2002, when they were tied, but Republicans won the popular vote for the House every time. The current WaPo numbers look like the average of 1996 and 1998, when Republicans won the popular vote 49 to 48 percent. As you may recall, they were on the defensive in the campaign dialogue in both cycles, in 1996 because of the backlash against the highly unpopular Newt Gingrich, in 1998 because of the backlash against the impeachment of Bill Clinton. They won the popular vote, and they won most of the seats anyway.

That's not to say they necessarily will this time. Scandals and other unforced errors seem sure to cost them 10 or more seats, and a loss of 15 seats produces a Democratic majority. But there are some other interesting numbers in the WaPo poll. Was it worth fighting in Iraq? Registered voters say no by a 44-to-53 percent margin. But that's not statistically different from the margin among registered voters in the WaPo's September 2004 poll: 46 to 51 percent. And the current WaPo's likely voters split, just barely, the other way: 49 to 48 percent. Similarly, on which party is better at handling Iraq, the WaPo has likely voters at 42 to 42 percent. Not a great endorsement of the president's party. But not the stinging rebuke that so much of the MSM coverage suggests.

Last summer, I wrote that the voters had decided that the Republicans deserved to lose but had not decided that the Democrats deserved to win. Sometime in October, as we spent our two or three weeks mulling over the Mark Foley scandal, one of Charlie Cook's ace staffers said that the voters had decided that the Democrats were an acceptable risk. Now I wonder whether that was right: whether in fact voters in the past week or so have been considering whether the Democrats deserved to win. The movement of independents in these polls to somewhat smaller anti-Bush margins and the apparent greater motivation of Republicans than Democrats to get out and vote suggest voters have been mulling over that question and that the Democrats, with their pounding anti-Bush rhetoric but their absence of much in the way of positive policies, might not be passing the test. And then along comes John Kerry. Voters may want to see George W. Bush checked by his opposition. But maybe not all that much.

All this said, I have been looking at three polls, and others may come along and point the other way. Republicans are plainly on the defensive in Senate and House races, and if they lose all or almost all the close Senate races and if they forfeit as many House seats as they seem likely to, Democrats could end up with majorities in both the House and Senate. On the House side, Republicans, even while holding most of their seats that have long been recognized as seriously contested, could lose overwhelmingly Bush '04 seats where Democrats are running attractive candidates and Republicans nominated by plurality candidates with serious liabilities (Idaho District One, Nebraska District Three) or where Republicans who have never had to campaign much have been caught unawares (New York 25). Many outcomes are possible. But those possible outcomes include some that seemed unrealistically optimistic for Republicans only a few days ago.

pa ground report [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
One Santorum volunteer I know reports knocking on 3oo doors in south central Penn. today, hearing most often: "These polls are absurd! I'm ready to show those media people how wrong they are!"

Re: Chafee in the lead in Rhode Island: all the in-state polls showed Whitehouse with a big lead, but less than 50%, and a huge undecided category. The "big" pollsters had the undecided in single numbers, one as low as 2% two weeks before the election. If they've been counting leaners and allocating all but the most adamant undecided, and are doing that in other races, all their results are worthless. I can't help but think some sort of election fraud law should apply.